validity of earthquake forecasting

It is often stated that in order for an earthquake forecast to be valid it must define 3 elements: 1) the date and time, 2) the location, and 3) the magnitude. We believe that this requirement is unrealistic for the same reason that a weather forecast is allowed to say that even on the most shiny days there is a 0-10% or 30-40% precipitation PROBABILITY, without specifying the precise location. This has been valid scientific practice for decades.

Our focus is on earthquakes with approximately magnitude 6 and greater because earthquakes in this category tend to occur more often when planets reach specific positions in the solar system, which explains the usual clustering of these larger earthquakes in time. A good example is December 2016, which was seismically very active because of more critical planetary positions throughout the month, which allowed us to issue three warnings in advance.

While statistics say something about the average occurrence over long periods of time, they do not say anything about the actual occurrence in real time. If for example statistics say that a magnitude 6 earthquake occurs every 2.7 days on average, it does not mean that this is what usually happens. In extreme cases there can be 20 or even 25 days between magnitude 6 earthquakes. Likewise, the average can go up to less than 2 days over a period of several weeks. In addition, there is a big difference between magnitude 6.0 and 6.9, the latter of which occurs much less frequently. The same applies to magnitude 7 earthquakes. While on average they occur every 20-24 days, in reality we sometimes see two or three in a month, while in extreme cases there can be a drought of half a year or more, like in 2017, 2018 and 2019.

It is often stated that earthquakes happen all the time or that planetary alignments happen all the time. These kind of statements are too general. One should ask what kind of earthquakes, like magnitude 4, 5 or 6, which are very different categories, both in strength and occurrence. Likewise, one should carefully study the occurrence and type of planetary alignments. Sometimes there are no alignments for more than a week or even two weeks. Sometimes there are 12 or even 15 alignments in one month, as was the case in December 2016. Also, not all alignments are the same and their electromagnetic influence greatly depends on the planets involved.

Finally, it is often said that planets have little influence, as the distance between them is too great for the gravitational force to be of significance. While mathematics can be applied to prove that the gravitational force is indeed (too) weak, the logic behind this reasoning is flawed at the very root, because it does not explain why only the gravitational force between the planets should be considered. After all, of the four fundamental forces currently recognized in nature, gravity is the weakest and usually dominated by the electromagnetic force. In the 1940s, 50s and 60s RCA's radio engineer John H. Nelson proved through observation of short wave radio communication that planetary positions in the solar system greatly affect Earth's atmosphere. Of nearly 1,500 atmospheric condition forecasts that he made in 1967 he had an accuracy rate of 93.2%. His forecast methods, while seemingly forgotten, have not been refuted to date.